Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions
Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> Fri, 12 July 2013 16:49 UTC
Return-Path: <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
X-Original-To: 6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610E121F9F70 for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:49:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6raNcxxcUUkE for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:49:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com (mail-ie0-f178.google.com [209.85.223.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B65F811E811E for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:49:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u16so21655873iet.9 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:49:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=KcVCdKG6wZyoD7gV22dYD7oStOJmMnyBtDRFAKaMzqU=; b=cXiYAxKrQOBQ687IrpZafq0jvaQ5qAlJvHLTG/hCWqjVvwCXrdzm0ASJTs8CT4EKxm 7UkOcCd9sHUnBtobyYwaXsB4RyRR+c+me3ne7FwAhCDHYTB4RnwvjTAIMwcPauYi/z9I pYHHCinEio7czr2ay89Liv0TmzmBtB9x802UL5d0RUXa7+Gklo73vM4J7yHlBAW8t5LA wsJ+M+NM0XQ3QCXcMbxIpfuOT5MmrCdZFX8E33ouVWlWeEEj3+mtHnvpPW6E/xMHSnhI W08ntcRuFzPhtTshy7zTREkhfW3LpLBt8KHxUUurfsPJXJ0PwkyZuQpBPsiw0S941Bps CoRg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.132.134 with SMTP id d6mr12552800ict.50.1373647769046; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:49:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.54.233 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:49:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <42BC72D8-EBEB-4CBB-A36D-B9DDF4877208@gmail.com>
References: <CADJ9OA8YUqyFSefpgxd7iurL-mk3sm0EEkNfmaZVkcP+jRUBNg@mail.gmail.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD84136FC01@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <CAAzoce7VSFFh=mA+fy+OaLE8Zd1c=HaaGEHdZ-XAWQONOWOnBg@mail.gmail.com> <42BC72D8-EBEB-4CBB-A36D-B9DDF4877208@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 00:49:28 +0800
Message-ID: <CAAzoce5ejtENnwvso-75rhXFs4uexRo9VTDib6K=C=vfFFUFsw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
To: Pascal Thubert <pascal.thubert@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="90e6ba3fcd7f521e4704e1534bbe"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkFA9MO5CXAr7dk3XP7Viot2QmyUeYvUvnJGDIlfgXe3tZ/+Wnl6lNSRK6pDz56FQucFHJ3
Cc: Thomas Watteyne <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu>, "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, 6TSCH <6tsch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions
X-BeenThere: 6tsch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss link layer model for Deterministic IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e, and impacts on RPL and 6LoWPAN such as resource allocation" <6tsch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tsch>, <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6tsch>
List-Post: <mailto:6tsch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch>, <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:49:41 -0000
Agree! Qin On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Pascal Thubert <pascal.thubert@gmail.com>wrote: > Well we still need to indicate that the link scope is one radio hop, that > much is non obvious. And I think it is better to have the entry if only to > avoid any confusion and insist that we use the IETF term, what do you think? > > Pascal > > Le 12 juil. 2013 à 18:42, Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> a écrit : > > Hi Pascal, > > Do you mean we use same definition of Link as IP link? If yes, maybe we > can remove the term of "Link" from this draft. How do you think? > > Thanks > Qin > > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) < > pthubert@cisco.com> wrote: > >> Hi Thomas:**** >> >> ** ** >> >> As an IETF document we can expect that the reader will understand the >> link as an IP link as opposed to a 802.15.4e one.**** >> >> Maybe our terminology should refer to existing RFCs and say that we have >> the same concept. We need to insist that these are one hop things for L3 >> operations…**** >> >> ** ** >> >> RFC 4862**** >> >> >> >> **** >> >> link - a communication facility or medium over which nodes can**** >> >> communicate at the link layer, i.e., the layer immediately below**** >> >> IP. Examples are Ethernets (simple or bridged); PPP links; X.25,** >> ** >> >> Frame Relay, or ATM networks; and Internet (or higher) layer**** >> >> "tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or IPv6 itself. The protocol* >> *** >> >> described in this document will be used on all types of links**** >> >> unless specified otherwise in the link-type-specific document**** >> >> describing how to operate IP on the link in line with [RFC4861]. ** >> ** >> >> interface - a node's attachment to a link.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Link**** >> >> a communication facility or medium over which nodes can**** >> >> communicate at the link layer, i.e., the layer immediately below**** >> >> IP. Examples are Ethernets (simple or bridged), PPP links, X.25,**** >> >> Frame Relay, or ATM networks as well as internet (or higher) layer**** >> >> "tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or IPv6 itself.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Cheers,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Pascal**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* 6tsch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:6tsch-bounces@ietf.org] *On >> Behalf Of *Thomas Watteyne >> *Sent:* vendredi 12 juillet 2013 15:40 >> >> *To:* 6TSCH >> *Subject:* [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Maria Rita,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I'm going over the (draft) terminology draft at >> https://bitbucket.org/6tsch/draft-palattella-6tsch-terminology/<https://bitbucket.org/6tsch/draft-palattella-6tsch-terminology/wiki/Home> , >> and see that the term "link" is defined as**** >> >> ** ** >> >> "Single-hop connection between two or more devices. It can be dedicated >> (point-to-point), multi-point, broadcast."**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Quick questions:**** >> >> - do we want to use the term link at all. This raised some conflicts with >> IETF and IEEE802.15.4e terminology, and we went for "bundle" and "cell". >> Maybe this "link" refers to a different element?**** >> >> - in the current definition, what do p-to-p and multi-point mean?**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Thanks,**** >> >> Thomas**** >> >> ** ** >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 6tsch mailing list >> 6tsch@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch >> >> > _______________________________________________ > 6tsch mailing list > 6tsch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch > >
- [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions Thomas Watteyne
- Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions Maria Rita PALATTELLA
- Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions Qin Wang
- Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions Pascal Thubert
- Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions Qin Wang